The most basic question about primate experimentation
that needs to be addressed is how many primates are used in
experimentation. The most basic answer is that we really donít know with
any degree of reliability. This requires an explanation.

The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) regulates animal
experimentation on the federal level. The AWA is enforced by the Animal &
Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), which is a part of the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA). One part of the AWA requires all
research facilities to report their animal use in experimentation to the
USDA/APHIS on an annual basis. APHIS then compiles these individual
facility reports together into a larger national report, called the Animal
Welfare Enforcement Report (AWER).

Do all of the laboratories that use animals report their
usage? An examination of the AWERs, which the USDA has compiled, reveals
that most facilities do report. However, the AWER has never (since 1985)
contained statistics from all active research laboratories. The total of
non-reporting facilities has varied (during the last five years) from 22
to 128 (out of approximately 1200 active laboratories). This problem of
non-reporting makes national statistics incomplete, at best. In the
primate experimentation area such non-reporting could be significant.

The total of primates used in experimentation published
by the USDA for fiscal 2000 is 57,518. This is a very large total.
However, it could be drastically inaccurate. According to the AWER for
2000, 22 laboratories did not report their animal use in time to be
included in the report, or did not report at all. This does not seem to be
an overly large percentage. But, with respect to primate experimentation,
it could be a very significant number.

Primate experimentation is largely centered in a few
laboratories, such as the eight regional primate research centers. It is
not uncommon for one laboratory to report primate experimentation numbers
in the thousands. If one laboratory (such as a primate center) utilizes
over 3500 primates, and statistics from one, two, or three of these
facilities are not included in the report, then any statistics based on
these totals would be substantially inaccurate.

A few examples of information from the reports of
specific laboratories will illustrate this situation. The fiscal 2000
reports are not yet accessible, but the fiscal 1998 reports are available.
What do the 1998 reports tell us? At one point it was possible to obtain
1998 animal use reports on the USDA/APHIS website. The 1998 reports for
several labs were obtained, examined, and cross-referenced with other
documents.

The 1998 AWER lists laboratories in the state of
Connecticut as using 190 primates. And if we compare the reports
(formerly) posted on the USDA/APHIS website for Connecticut the totals
seem to jibe. However, are the reports themselves accurate?

One of the largest research facilities in the state of
Connecticut is at Yale University in New Haven. It seems that the folks at
Yale are somewhat numerically challenged. The report forms filed by Yale
staff with the USDA for fiscal 1998 are very confusing. The report lists
32 primates as experimented on and 71 as being held for use in breeding,
conditioning, etc. The exceptions to standard care section of the report
lists 22 different primates as being deprived of water during
experimentation. This section also lists 65 macaque monkeys as being
deprived of food during experimentation. This means that either the
primates were being deprived of both food and water during
experimentation, or at least 87 primates were experimented on. Even if
only 62 primates were experimented on (which means that 22 of these 65
were deprived of both food and water), that is still significantly
different from the 32 primates that are listed as being experimented on.
Also, the total for primates listed on Yaleís USDA report is 103 (32 +
71).

This is very confusing; especially since a USDA
inspection report for Yale dated 7/14 & 15/98 lists 198 non-human primates
as being on the premises of Yale. What was done with those other 95
primates that are not accounted for?

Additionally, the numbers for animals held for breeding
or conditioning are not included in the experimentation total. The
Connecticut total for primates in this category is 182. 190 are listed as
being experimented on in Connecticut. But, the actual total for primates
in labs in Connecticut for 1998 is 372, not 190. But then, maybe we need
to add those other 95 primates that Yale conveniently forgot. That brings
our total for Connecticut to 467 primates actually in labs in 1998. The
true total is more than twice that listed by the USDA Animal Welfare
Enforcement Report for 1998.

Now, if we examine the numbers for the state of
Louisiana a similar phenomenon is repeated. The numbers match up for
primates that are experimented on (7,935), but another 5,763 are listed
for breeding purposes. That makes the real total for Louisiana 13,698.
That is an inaccuracy of about 42%.

Are there any other examples of inaccuracy?
Unfortunately there are many. During fiscal 1998 Harvard Medical School
reported experiments using 293 primates and holding 43 on hand for
breeding purposes. This is a very interesting report in light of the fact
that the Harvard Medical School is the recipient of the NIH grant that
funds the New England Regional Primate Research Center (NERPRC). This
facility typically has well over 1,000 primates on hand at any one time.
The annual progress report filed by Harvard/NERPRC with the NIH lists a
research colony of 887 and a breeding colony of 674 for a total of 1,561.
This is a discrepancy of over 1,200 primates.

In the three instances discussed above the USDA numbers
omitted 7,265 primates, or over 46%. If this same level of error is
applied to the total for primate usage, a total is reached (for fiscal
2000) of 106, 515 primates currently imprisoned in labs across the United
States.

The bottom line is that we really donít know how many
primates are used in experimentation every year, or how many primates are
held captive in labs as breeding stock. The USDA/APHIS reporting system is
too flawed, and the laboratories seem to be either inaccurate or
dishonest. The only thing that can be said for certain is that the numbers
promulgated by the USDA/APHIS ignore thousands of primates.

It is difficult to discern trends from the numbers
promulgated by the USDA due to their inherent inaccuracies. Therefore we
have used information from the CRISP system of the National Institutes of
Health as a basis for developing some inkling as to the general direction
that primate experimentation is moving in. When the grant listings for
projects involving the primary primate species utilized in experimentation
(macaque monkeys, baboons, squirrel monkeys, and chimpanzees) the obvious
trend is that primate experimentation is increasing. In fiscal 1992 858
NIH funded projects utilized the four primate species we have discussed as
being used most commonly. In fiscal 2001 1361 projects utilized the same
four species. This change represents an increase of 58% in a ten-year
period (see table below for specifics).